[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: quantum Computing

To: Rick Busdiecker <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: quantum Computing
From: [email protected] (Mike McNally)
Date: Wed, 18 May 94 13:03:43 CDT
Cc: [email protected]
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]><[email protected]>
Sender: [email protected]

Rick Busdiecker writes:
 > No, NFA is acceptable and correct, it's Non-determinisic Finite
 > Automaton.  A non-deterministic Turing machine is a perfectly
 > reasonable example, however.

Uhh, isn't it the case that a Turing machine can simulate an NFA, but
not the reverse?  An NFA has no tape, and therefore is not as powerful
an automaton as a Turing machine.  Thus an NFA can be implemented by
an NTM, but not the reverse.

I think.

--
| GOOD TIME FOR MOVIE - GOING ||| Mike McNally <[email protected]>       |
| TAKE TWA TO CAIRO.          ||| Tivoli Systems, Austin, TX:        |
|     (actual fortune cookie) ||| "Like A Little Bit of Semi-Heaven" |

Follow-Ups:
- Re: quantum Computing
  - From: "Perry E. Metzger" <[email protected]>
- Re: quantum Computing
  - From: Rick Busdiecker <[email protected]>

References:
- Re: quantum Computing
  - From: [email protected] (Mike McNally)
- Re: quantum Computing
  - From: Rick Busdiecker <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: quantum Computing
Next by Date: Re: quantum Computing
Prev by thread: Re: quantum Computing
Next by thread: Re: quantum Computing
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread